From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97483BC69 for ; Mon, 24 Dec 2007 17:28:46 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAJJtb0fVJFBblmdsb2JhbACQDgEBAQEHBAYHGweYCQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,204,1196636400"; d="scan'208";a="6003534" Received: from mx-out.libertysurf.net (HELO mail.libertysurf.net) ([213.36.80.91]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 24 Dec 2007 17:28:46 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.2] (91.168.184.184) by mail.libertysurf.net (7.3.118.8) id 470CEC8700E0D964 for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Mon, 24 Dec 2007 18:28:19 +0100 From: Florent Monnier To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [ANN] glMLite Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2007 17:28:31 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <200712232257.33658.fmonnier@linux-nantes.fr.eu.org> <20071224085444.GC19543@takhisis.invalid> <0F10F9FC-2F5E-44CD-8E60-E79D4B730E80@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <0F10F9FC-2F5E-44CD-8E60-E79D4B730E80@gmx.de> Organization: l'Association Linux-Nantes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200712241728.32173.fmonnier@linux-nantes.fr.eu.org> X-Face: -0"dKXwF0PiXr]fa$^)NJY7$;waqUckGcM7&q,VU?Xv\[=CiVM]g]pDs^xmfU9+Q=Z,OdfMHUR-7Ao%evJh.=aiq,#r0Ux0dm'!l|zeAXj||$>1_(Lv4Hc",&F}sbHeK0`SBA$_|XP Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam: no; 0.00; lablgl:01 lablgl:01 variants:01 polymorphic:01 caml-list:01 functions:01 functions:01 modules:02 binding:02 binding:02 seems:03 opengl:03 parameters:03 parameters:03 types:05 Hi, > > Can you please compare glMLite with LablGL [1]? > > ... and glcaml [2] :) I have never used glcaml. When I have begin my binding, glcaml was not release yet, so that's why I begun my own. What I can say as difference from reading the generated documentation is that each of the 3 openGL binding resolve the problem of the GLenum parameters (that often collide between several functions) in a different way. GLCaml provides one big glenum type that contains all the parameters for all the functions (so it seems there is no type check at all), LablGL uses polymorphic variants, and glMLite packs the problematic types in modules. So users have the choice :) -- Regards